So You Still Want to Choose Your Senator?

The New York Times (Terrorist Tip Sheet) ^ | June 1, 2010 | David Firestone

[Retired Greyhound]

It should absolutely be repealed.

You can clearly see how liberals are opposed to states rights.

Pretty soon there will be a move to abolish the Electoral College.

[texmexis best]

When we adopted the 17th amendment our Senators became Federal animals.

By repealing it, they will again become a state animal as was so wisely intended.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

The author failed to mention this little tidbit:

From Wikipedia:

The following states neither ratified nor rejected the amendment:

1.Alabama
2.Kentucky
3.Mississippi
4.Virginia
5.South Carolina
6.Georgia
7.Maryland
8.Delaware
9.Rhode Island
10.Florida

[BelegStrongbow]

It would also pave the way for Conservatives in Britain to resist democratizing the House of Lords (though that seems too far along to halt, now).

[Paladin2]

State legislatures are just breeding grounds for CongressCritters. They are clearly too retarded to pick US Senators.

[livius]

The Times is too dumb to realize that the Senators are supposed to represent the states as entities. That is why they were to be appointed by the local democratically elected representatives, in order to reflect the interests of the individual state.

[cvq3842]

It’s a good idea.

[Genoa]

Well, after 2008, I sure don't trust the voters with the job of electing the President. Neither did the framers. That's why they had an electoral college. For years, South Carolina didn't include the voters. The legislature selected the presidential electors.

[paddles]

SPOT ON!

Today, Senators are elected by K Street not main street.

[Former Proud Canadian]

I love this portion:

It may be true that appointed senators, accountable only to state legislators, would never approve of many useful federal mandates designed to put the national interest above local parochialism — including everything from the minimum wage to the new health care reform law.

Yeah, that's the point.

[Boiling point]

The fact that the 17th amendment was enacted in 1913 says volumes. Woodrow Wilson liked it, and income tax, and the Federal Reserve, The League of Nations, A virtual cornucopia of progressive ideas.

[Publius]

Pretty soon there will be a move to abolish the Electoral College.

In December 1829, Andrew Jackson wrote his first State of the Union letter to Congress. (It was a letter then, not a speech.) In it he proposed the following amendments to the Constitution:

1. Changing the word "republic" to "democracy".
2. Abolishing the Electoral College and electing the president by direct popular vote without respect to state.
3. Ending the practce of having state legislatures select senators and go to direct popular election.

He got the last one, but it was 76 years after he left office.

[cvq3842]

He probably wasn’t too opposed to the ideas of eugenics either. He may have been the most virulently racist president America has ever had.

[Army Air Corps]

The repeal of the 17th Amendment would also increase interest and participation in elections for state legislatures.

[antiRepublicrat]

Congressmen represent the people. Senators represent the states. That’s how it was designed. The states lost their representation after the 17th, and now look how much power they have left.

[rellimpank]

--yeah--I can imagine the California, Illinois, or New York state legislatures doing just a wonderful job of filling Senate seats.

--one of the primary reasons for the adoption of the 17th amendment was railroad domination of several state legislatures-----

[aruanan]

He got the last one, but it was 76 years after he left office.

Let's rescind that and use the states to put the brakes on Washington.

[skr]

it’s a good idea when state legislatures aren’t corrupt. It seems somewhat insular in this day and age.

[rockinqsranch]

Thanks for posting. That was what I was thinking and was about to post as well.